Kan. Plan Would Put School-Funding Onus On State Legislature

Setting aside the potential obstacles posed by politics, computer
printouts, and local fallout, Kansas officials have recommended a bold
new school-finance plan that would shift all school-funding
responsibility-and property-taxing authority--to the state.

If implemented, the proposal would profoundly reshape the way Kansas
pays for its schools and challenge the principle of local funding that
has guided American education throughout its history.

Members of the panel that proposed the plan late last month said
they had little choice but to call for radical changes in light of a
state judge's preliminary ruling arguing that, in Kansas at least, the
idea that local communities pay for their schools is scarcely more than
an illusion.

In a pretrial ruling setting ground rules for a legal challenge to
the state's school finance system, State District Judge Terry L. Bullock
had declared that the Kansas constitution requires total state funding
of all public schools, regardless of current practices or concepts of
local school control. The state currently funds about 42 percent of
Kansas public schools' budgets.

"This legislative duty is not to districts, not to schools, not to
towns or cities, not to voters, not to counties, not to personal
constituents," Judge Bullock wrote, "but to each schoolchild of Kansas,
equally."

"Money raised by school districts through 'local' taxation is still
state money," he continued. "It just hasn't been thought of that
way."

Whatever its philosophy and constitutional principles, however, many
observers in the state question whether the plan or any remnant of it,
can survive the practical and parochial forces it is sure to face
during next year's session of the legislature.

Nevertheless, the panel's radical recommendations seem likely to
ensure that Kansas lawmakers and educators next year will be grappling
with the basic issues of how to finance education fairly.

"To my knowledge, there's no system in the United States to ensure
equal opportunity other than equal dollars," said Representative Rick
Bowden, the chairman of the House Education Committee and the head of
the task force. "I don't know of any other way we have right now."

Going All the Way

Although Judge Bullock's October ruling did not actually strike'
down the existing school-finance system, it was taken by state
officials as a clear sign that a major overhaul was in the offing,
either by legislative action or judicial order. In response, Gov. Joan
Finney appointed the 16-member task force to propose changes.

Consultants who worked with the task force said panelists quickly
showed a willingness to go with the most comprehensive solution
offered.

The group was presented with a plan based on the school-finance
remedy being implemented in Texas, which established regional taxing
authorities that require minimum property-tax rates; the plan also
included modifications to the existing Kansas program.

It became clear, however, that panel members were interested in
going further, recalled John Augenblick, one of three advisers who met
with the group.

"They viewed this as an opportunity to suggest a fundamental change
in the system," said Mr. Augenblick, a partner in a Denver
education-consulting firm. "They chose to go all the way rather than to
go halfway."

David C. Thompson, who has worked as a consultant both to school
districts suing the state and the state itself, said that since the
task force was not required to draft a plan that would survive
politically, members simply embraced basic principles of equity.

"The judge's opinion was the final prod for them to say aloud the
things that they had been told and knew were right," said Mr. Thompson,
who is co-director of the University Council of Education
Administrators' Center for Education Finance at Kansas State
University. "It's not as if they had never heard it before, but this
was the first time they've had to admit it."

Specifically, the group's recommendations call for: . A uniform,
statewide property tax system for school-district operations, together
with additional state revenue to fund building and maintenance
projects.

. A base per-pupil appropriation to be provided to local districts
by the state. Incremental increases would also be provided for
bilingual-, vocational-, and special-education students, as well as for
transportation of students bused more than 2.5 miles. . All revenue
schools receive from state sources, such as motor-vehicle and mineral
taxes, would revert to the state. Local levies would be allowed only to
finance adult-education programs or pay legal judgments.

The task force also urged reforms in the state's property-appraisal
system.

'Un-American' Plan?

Observers said a great distinction has to be made between the task
force's proposals and what can survive legislative fights in a tight
budget year.

"They can recommend anything they want," noted Mr. Augenblick. "But
it's the legislature that's going to have to chew on this."

Some analysts suggested that the panel had set its sights on an
ideal plan in hopes that at least some elements would remain once the
legislature had completed its handiwork.

"They know this is not going to come out of the legislature looking
like this, so this is a way to get good press and look good in court,"
said Mr. Thompson. "The way to get where they want to go is to go
beyond it and then fall back."

Analysts also predicted that such retrenchment and formulation of
compromise proposals would begin as soon as copies of the task force's
report began to receive wide distribution last week.

The expected fallout from school officials, parents, and taxpayers
turned some task-force members into critics even before the report was
published.

Politicians and observers alike have raised questions about what
would happen to property-tax rates under a statewide levy. Officials
are also bracing for wide-ranging criticism over the state's attack on
local control of schools.

"This is so contrary to our way of thinking that even people who
would benefit in their own districts are unhappy with it and calling it
un-American," said Senator Sheila Frahm, the vice chairman of the
Senate Education Committee and a task-force member.

Representative Bowden noted, however, that the judge's opinion
emphasized that the Kansas constitution provides little role for local
control. "Local control is a thing of the past in a lot of ways, if you
think local control is financial control," he said. "We're still
leaving local control in how best to spend the money."

Statewide Tax Rate

Some hackles have already been raised as officials begin to
translate the task force's philosophy into dollars and cents.

State officials have estimated that, in order to maintain current
education spending, the statewide property-tax levy would have to be
set at $5.86 per $100 of assessed value. Property-tax rates currently
range from $0.91 to $9.78.

The task force did not take a position on the statewide tax rate,
but many state officials, including Mr. Bowden, argue that the $5.86
rate is too high. The only practical strategy, he said, would be to
find other funds within the state budget to lower the statewide rate to
between $4.00 and $4.50.

Critics, including Ms. Frahm, said it was unlikely that the state
would be able to find the money to take over full school funding.

"We're talking a lot of money," she said, citing construction and
maintenance funding that would be necessary beyond the base levy and
scant state resources to provide the property-tax relief mentioned by
Mr. Bowden. Ms. Frahm also voiced concern about the impact on taxpayers
in traditionally low- tax areas.

Officials also said the proposal clashes with the tax-cutting
sentiment evident in Ms. Finney's upset victory in the 1990
election.

A proposal for a $3.00 statewide levy "was torn apart" by lawmakers
during this year's session as they attempted to balance calls for
property tax relief and school-funding reforms, Ms. Frahm noted. In
addition, the Governor used her line-item-veto authority to abolish a
$55-million state-aid increase for schools and a measure to raise the
state sales tax. Observers expect school districts to raise property
taxes in order to balance this year's budgets.

Governor Finney, who empaneled the task force and charged its
members to find a solution that would meet the standards outlined by
Judge Bullock, has also been less than enthusiastic about the group's
work.

Mary Holladay, the Governor's appointments secretary and a member of
the task force, said Ms. Finney was "cautiously reviewing' the
document, but had not changed her opposition to new taxes.

"She is pleased that the task force looked at the direction the
judge gave in terms of children, but she has to consider the economy
here," Ms. Holladay said.

Searching for Consensus

Mr. Thompson of Kansas State said that beyond the political
maneuvering and debate in the state capital, another challenge will
come in developing a consensus among educators over the solution.

As a consultant to three of the four school groups challenging the
current funding system, Mr. Thompson said he has already used his
powers of persuasion to urge the educators to think of one other
instead of themselves.

"Even though I have warned the districts I work with that if they
engage in selfish behavior that I'm not going to support them, I'm not
sure that in the long haul they can remain true to that," he said.

Mr. Augenblick noted that, while much of the recent action has been
fueled by a desire to avoid a court confrontation over school- finance,
he has advised state officials not to panic as they put together a
plan.

"To make up a system completely in response to the words that the
judge wrote is over-interpreting. This is a lower-court opinion and
there has been no trial," he said. "This is all theoretical. The thing
they have to do is figure out how much this is going to cost, and the
question then is will that be politically acceptable."

Vol. 11, Issue 14, Pages 1, 20

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.